Grand Designs Episode Information Cheltenham: The Underground House

Comments

1. It don't think it would be considered normal to include a cold joint during an ICF basement pour and this cold joint ended up causing a lot of problems. Was there a particular reason for not placing the concrete core in a continuous pour that would typically placed by working around the walls in 900mm-1200mmm lifts using a pencil vibrator to ensure the elimination of voids. Some aspects of avoiding voids in ICF walls are outlined in this research paper Concrete Consolidation and the Potential for Voids in ICF Walls available as a free download. http://www.cement.org/bookstore/profile.asp?itemid=RD134

   Posted by Stephen on 12/09/2009 06:16:20

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
2. Lots of you have discussed a win a house competition in these comments. I’d just like to clarify that Channel 4 is not party to or involved with the organisation of any ‘win a house’ competitions.

   Posted by Lelia Ferro, C4 Editor on 27/05/2009 14:36:27

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
3. Still awaiting my promised refund...

   Posted by Simon Reed on 26/04/2009 18:49:00

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
4. i have not recived vouchers kind regards dave havard

   Posted by dave havard on 13/03/2009 09:31:59

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
5. This competition looks interesting but I've been wondering about this condition: "The Promoters make no representation or warranty as to the Valuation or the Prize, its structural or cosmetic condition or its ability to be sold. Entrants should make and rely on their own enquiries and legal advice about the Prize before entering the Competition." Not sure how I'd go about checking this out before entering, as I live 100s of miles away. Does anyone know anything more about the house - i.e. would it be sellable in the future? BTW, in the few minutes I was checking the site out the number of entrants increased by 3. It's at 3600 now. (slowly but surely).

   Posted by Jay on 23/02/2009 15:07:04

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
6. A quick update. I sent an email threatening legal action if my money wasn't refunded and amazingly had it returned to my paypal accounts two hours after sending the email. So that seems to be how to get your money back...

   Posted by Will on 17/02/2009 14:00:09

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
7. I asked for my money back as the rules had changed. They confirmed I would get a refund in December but despite chasing I have not had the money back and can currently not get a response as all from the emails given on the competition site. Is anyone else having similar problems?

   Posted by Will on 17/02/2009 10:20:00

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
8. I have also entered the competition to win the Cheltenham House and too am dismayed at the change in the competition rules..Spotting a Frisbee is not one of my strong points. I would like to know if any of the people below has had a reply from Tim or Zoe regarding the change of rules and especially if, entry to the competition in its original format still applies, or, are we entitled to a refund of any monies paid?

   Posted by Jooles on 23/01/2009 16:24:42

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
9. I'm also concerned about the change in competition rules, especially since money was previously taken (ref Sales of Goods Act). I'll certainly be contacting my local Citizens Advice Bureau...

   Posted by Ady on 01/01/2009 10:49:06

   Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
10. I wrote to Tim & Zoe: "I am concerned about this change - as I am sure many, many others are. The spot-the-frisbee competition and charity donation etc were not what we signed up for. As far as your advertisement went, it was a raffle for the property, with every entrant having exactly the same chance of winning with their ticket number. This is not so with the frisbee and tiebreaker situation. It's not a fair method of deciding who wins the house in my opinion. What are the criteria for deciding what makes a good answer to the tiebreaker? Spelling, sob-stories, "green" credentials? Who makes up the panel? The date of the draw was supposed to be 1 January 2009 and now entrants have to wait a further 3 months - can we expect another extension before the draw date? What would have been wrong with lottery status for this? For now, I think I would prefer a refund." Perhaps others have the same questions? Maria

    Posted by Maria on 24/12/2008 22:07:28

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
11. The Gambling Commission doesn't like the fact that these raffles asked questions before people bought a ticket...therefore there was no limit for the amoount of times they could enter before getting the question right.. therefore a lottery. It's a shame that these people feel that they are exempt from real market valuations of their house. It was a tiny house using untried methods. Prooves that even Grand designs aren't exluded from common sense valuations. What a shame they didn't value it realistically and sell it. They could have moved and be settled somewhere else by now.

    Posted by Patricia on 11/12/2008 14:58:42

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
12. I am disappointed to hear that the commission has found similar lotteries unlawfull. Has this one also been deemed unlawful? I hope not it would be nice to be part of such a wonderfull dream. If it is deemed illegal will participants be refunded.

    Posted by rowena on 08/12/2008 22:19:14

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
13. Google 'Win the Cheltenham House'

    Posted by dizzy on 26/11/2008 12:22:53

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
14. This house looks superb and it an eco property to boot! Question: Where can the raffle tickets be purchased from? I've been searching the Web with no luck! All the best with the raffle and hope you reach your target of 46K ticket sales.

    Posted by J Neill on 18/11/2008 11:12:08

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
15. i like the way this house looks if i had the money i would buy it but i can dream cant i haha well i think and i problebly right that it must have taken some time to bulid and must have cost quite alot of money so yeah good bye xoxoxox

    Posted by x.o.xalliwali.x.o.x on 07/11/2008 10:46:47

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
16. I have been monitoring this lottery and even thought its legality is still questionable I see you are still actively promoting it, can you explain your reasoning for this please ? Can we ask Kevin to get back to this house and ask what was the thinking behind this Grand Design if it only ends up in a lottery.

    Posted by Simon on 02/11/2008 09:59:41

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
17. "think that Tim and Zoe have found that the market is dictating to them in that only 8600 tickets have been sold and consequently they will not sell the house unless sales pick up by an astonishing amount. Posted by Polly on 13/10/2008 14:04:10" Do not forget this has generated them £75250 so far. This amount is generated from the entry fees under condition no.44, and thereby reducing the prize fund by 35%. The prize fund is therefore £118250. the odds of winning are 8600/1 so it is better odds than the premium bonds.

    Posted by graham on 19/10/2008 01:15:44

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
18. I think that Tim and Zoe have found that the market is dictating to them in that only 8600 tickets have been sold and consequently they will not sell the house unless sales pick up by an astonishing amount.

    Posted by Polly on 13/10/2008 14:04:10

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
19. This was the most ridiculous build ever! The house they had was gorgeous and they ruined it by building a concrete mess in the garden!!

    Posted by Frog on 06/10/2008 22:55:24

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
20. I think it's a wonderful, stylish and brave design. I admire Tim and Zoe very much for coming up with such a bold idea, but especially for turning it into a reality. How inspiring to have a living proof of their personality and creativity. I applaud them for making it so eco-friendly and yet so chic. CONGRATULATIONS. You deserve a total success with the sale!

    Posted by HLSC on 06/10/2008 20:50:40

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
21. Good on Tim and Zoe. They are not letting the market dictate to them. I'm going to have a try, and at £25 a ticket it seem well worth it. Admittedlyits not for all properties but this is a great opportunity.

    Posted by philip on 04/10/2008 11:46:04

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
22. Isn't this the one that they're now trying to raffle as they couldn't sell it? So much for it being a family home - seems they can't wait to leave.

    Posted by Polly on 26/09/2008 13:20:44

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment
23. Fantastic project needing bravery indeed. Good luck happened and the build is quite amazing. Rather stange in the area but as I said .... amazing

    Posted by Thomas Wilson on 12/09/2008 23:38:54

    Offensive? Unsuitable? Report this comment